DOCSLIB.ORG

Oregon Semaphore Grass (Pleuropogon Oregonus)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oregon Semaphore Grass (Pleuropogon Oregonus) Oregon semaphore grass (Pleuropogon oregonus) THREATENED Flowering spike (left), habit (center), and habitat (right) of Oregon semaphore grass. Photos by Jordan Brown (left) and ODA staff (center and right). If downloading images from this website, please credit the photographer. Family Poaceae Plant description Oregon semaphore grass is a perennial arising from slender rhizomes with purplish red scales and long soft internodes. The culms are erect, soft and spongy, and 55-90 cm tall. Sheaths are overlapping and closed for 3/4 their length, the lower sheaths loose, purplish red, and nearly smooth, the upper ones scaberulous and striate. Ligules are white, lacerate, membranous, and 4-5 mm long. Leaf blades are erect, flat, slightly scaberulous on the upper surface and sometimes also the lower, abruptly narrowed to an acute, mucronate apex, and 8-18 cm long by 0.4-0.7 cm wide, the uppermost blades reduced. Racemes are somewhat erect with slender axes 6-20 cm long bearing 6-8 spikelets on 2-12 mm-long pedicels. Spikelets are erect or ascending, spreading toward one side of the raceme, 2-4 cm long, and green tinged with purple, each bearing 7-14 flowers, the upper florets pistillate, the lower perfect. Glumes are pale and membranous, unequal, and 2-4 mm long; rachilla joints are 2-3 mm long; lemmas are strongly 7-nerved, 5.5-7 mm long by about 3 mm wide, with an erect awn 6-10 mm long at the apex; paleas are approximately equal to the lemmas, each of the two palea keels bearing a slender, erect to spreading awn 2-7 mm long attached about one- third from the base of the palea; anthers are brown to purple, 4 mm long. Distinguishing characteristics Pleuropogon refractus is the only other species of Pleuropogon that occurs in Oregon. Although similar in appearance to Oregon semaphore grass, P. refractus is taller (100- 150 cm tall versus 55-90 cm tall), has awnless paleas (versus paleas with a pair of awns), and occurs west of the Cascade Mountains (versus east of the Cascades). When to survey Surveys for Oregon semaphore grass should be completed when the species is in flower and/or fruit, from June through July. Habitat Oregon semaphore grass is an obligate wetland species occurring in wet meadows and marshlands in areas of sluggish moving water at elevations ranging from about 1000- 1700 m (3300-5600 feet). Associated grasses and sedges include Beckmannia syzigachne, Deschampsia caespitosa, D. danthonioides, Glyceria borealis, Hordeum brachyantherum, Carex athrostachya, C. nebrascensis, C. saxatilis, and Eleocharis palustris. Range One of the rarest grasses in North America, this species is known from several small occurrences divided between two disjunct population centers in eastern Oregon, one in southern Lake County and one in southern Union County, separated by a distance of approximately 370 km (230 miles). The majority of Oregon semaphore grass plants are located on private lands, and thus are not protected by state threatened and endangered species legislation. Attempts have been made to create three new populations of Oregon semaphore grass on administratively protected lands in Lake and Grant Counties, but transplant success rates have been mixed and the long term survival of these created populations is tenuous. Oregon counties Lake, Union Federal status Species of Concern Threats Possible threats to Oregon semaphore grass include heavy grazing by livestock and habitat loss due to agricultural development or hydrological alterations within sites occupied by the species. A few extant occurrences are very small and at risk of extirpation due to chance events. Did you know? Oregon semaphore grass was first collected in 1886 by W. C. Cusick in Hog Valley, probably near Union in Union County, Oregon. It was collected again in 1901 by A. B. Leckenby in Union, Oregon, then in 1936 by M. E. Peck from a location west of Adel in Lake County, Oregon. Unobserved for decades afterward, the species was reported as extinct or endangered in the late 1970s by state and federal watch groups, until it was rediscovered in Lake County in 1979, likely from the same location where it was last collected by Peck, 47 years earlier. References Benson, L. 1941. Taxonomic studies. American Journal of Botany 28:358-359, 362. But, P. P. H., J. Kagan, V. L. Crosby, and J. S. Shelly. 1985. Rediscovery and reproductive biology of Pleuropogon oregonus (Poaceae). Madroño 32:189-190. But, P. P. H. 1977. Systematics of Pleuropogon R. Br. (Poaceae). Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, California. Chase, A. 1938. New grasses from Oregon. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 28:52-53. Chase, A. 1950. Pleuropogon In: Hitchcock, A. S., and A. Chase, Manual of the grasses of the United States, 2nd ed. Vol. 1. pp. 94-98. Meinke, R. J. 1982. Threatened and endangered vascular plants of Oregon: An illustrated guide. Unpublished report for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland, Oregon. Oregon Department of Agriculture, Salem, Oregon. OFP (Oregon Flora Project). 2010. Oregon Plant Atlas. http://www.oregonflora.org/atlas.php. Accessed August 25, 2011. ORBIC (Oregon Biodiversity Information Center). 2010a. Rare, threatened and endangered species of Oregon. Institute for Natural Resources, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon. 105 pp. Available at http://orbic.pdx.edu/documents/2010-rte-book.pdf (pdf document, 971 kB). Accessed December 10, 2010. ORBIC (Oregon Biodiversity Information Center). 2010b. ORBIC element occurrence database. Portland, Oregon. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Eleocharis Palustris (L.) Roem
    Plant Guide COMMON SPIKERUSH Conservation Uses: This species has utility for erosion control, constructed wetland system applications, wildlife Eleocharis palustris (L.) Roem. & food and cover, wetland creation and restoration, and for Schult. increasing plant diversity in wetland and riparian Plant Symbol = ELPA3 communities. Its dense root mass makes this species an excellent choice for soil stabilization in riparian and wetland sites. The rhizomes also form a matrix for many Contributed by: USDA NRCS Idaho Plant Materials beneficial bacteria making this plant an excellent choice Program for wastewater treatment. Status Please consult the PLANTS Web site and your State Department of Natural Resources for this plant’s current status (e.g., threatened or endangered species, state noxious status, and wetland indicator values). Description General: Rush Family (Cyperaceae). Creeping spikerush is a perennial, heavily rhizomatous wetland plant that is found from low to mid elevations. It has a dense root mass that extends deeper that 40 cm (16 in) in the soil profile. The stems are singular or in small clusters and it will continue to grow to keep the heads out of the water if the water rises slowly. The stems are upright, round, and may reach 1.2 m (4 ft) in height (height is dependent on the depth of water in the growing environment). The leaves are reduced to sheaths clustered at the base of the stems. The flowers are borne in a terminal spikelet, 1 flower per scale with 2 stigmas. Plants typically flower from June through September. The seeds are yellow to brown lenticular achenes, 1.5-2.5 mm (0.06-0.1 in) long including tubercle, and subtended by up to 8 bristles (Welsh et al., 2003).
    [Show full text]
  • "National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary."
    Intro 1996 National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands The Fish and Wildlife Service has prepared a National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary (1996 National List). The 1996 National List is a draft revision of the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1988 National Summary (Reed 1988) (1988 National List). The 1996 National List is provided to encourage additional public review and comments on the draft regional wetland indicator assignments. The 1996 National List reflects a significant amount of new information that has become available since 1988 on the wetland affinity of vascular plants. This new information has resulted from the extensive use of the 1988 National List in the field by individuals involved in wetland and other resource inventories, wetland identification and delineation, and wetland research. Interim Regional Interagency Review Panel (Regional Panel) changes in indicator status as well as additions and deletions to the 1988 National List were documented in Regional supplements. The National List was originally developed as an appendix to the Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (Cowardin et al.1979) to aid in the consistent application of this classification system for wetlands in the field.. The 1996 National List also was developed to aid in determining the presence of hydrophytic vegetation in the Clean Water Act Section 404 wetland regulatory program and in the implementation of the swampbuster provisions of the Food Security Act. While not required by law or regulation, the Fish and Wildlife Service is making the 1996 National List available for review and comment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts
    The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist • First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Somers Bruce Sorrie and Paul Connolly, Bryan Cullina, Melissa Dow Revision • First A County Checklist Plants of Massachusetts: Vascular The A County Checklist First Revision Melissa Dow Cullina, Bryan Connolly, Bruce Sorrie and Paul Somers Massachusetts Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program The Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program (NHESP), part of the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, is one of the programs forming the Natural Heritage network. NHESP is responsible for the conservation and protection of hundreds of species that are not hunted, fished, trapped, or commercially harvested in the state. The Program's highest priority is protecting the 176 species of vertebrate and invertebrate animals and 259 species of native plants that are officially listed as Endangered, Threatened or of Special Concern in Massachusetts. Endangered species conservation in Massachusetts depends on you! A major source of funding for the protection of rare and endangered species comes from voluntary donations on state income tax forms. Contributions go to the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Fund, which provides a portion of the operating budget for the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. NHESP protects rare species through biological inventory,
    [Show full text]
  • State of New York City's Plants 2018
    STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 Daniel Atha & Brian Boom © 2018 The New York Botanical Garden All rights reserved ISBN 978-0-89327-955-4 Center for Conservation Strategy The New York Botanical Garden 2900 Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10458 All photos NYBG staff Citation: Atha, D. and B. Boom. 2018. State of New York City’s Plants 2018. Center for Conservation Strategy. The New York Botanical Garden, Bronx, NY. 132 pp. STATE OF NEW YORK CITY’S PLANTS 2018 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 6 INTRODUCTION 10 DOCUMENTING THE CITY’S PLANTS 10 The Flora of New York City 11 Rare Species 14 Focus on Specific Area 16 Botanical Spectacle: Summer Snow 18 CITIZEN SCIENCE 20 THREATS TO THE CITY’S PLANTS 24 NEW YORK STATE PROHIBITED AND REGULATED INVASIVE SPECIES FOUND IN NEW YORK CITY 26 LOOKING AHEAD 27 CONTRIBUTORS AND ACKNOWLEGMENTS 30 LITERATURE CITED 31 APPENDIX Checklist of the Spontaneous Vascular Plants of New York City 32 Ferns and Fern Allies 35 Gymnosperms 36 Nymphaeales and Magnoliids 37 Monocots 67 Dicots 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report, State of New York City’s Plants 2018, is the first rankings of rare, threatened, endangered, and extinct species of what is envisioned by the Center for Conservation Strategy known from New York City, and based on this compilation of The New York Botanical Garden as annual updates thirteen percent of the City’s flora is imperiled or extinct in New summarizing the status of the spontaneous plant species of the York City. five boroughs of New York City. This year’s report deals with the City’s vascular plants (ferns and fern allies, gymnosperms, We have begun the process of assessing conservation status and flowering plants), but in the future it is planned to phase in at the local level for all species.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Common Native & Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska
    Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska Cover photographs by (top to bottom, left to right): Tara Chestnut/Hannah E. Anderson, Jamie Fenneman, Vanessa Morgan, Dana Visalli, Jamie Fenneman, Lynda K. Moore and Denny Lassuy. Introduction to Common Native & Potential Invasive Freshwater Plants in Alaska This document is based on An Aquatic Plant Identification Manual for Washington’s Freshwater Plants, which was modified with permission from the Washington State Department of Ecology, by the Center for Lakes and Reservoirs at Portland State University for Alaska Department of Fish and Game US Fish & Wildlife Service - Coastal Program US Fish & Wildlife Service - Aquatic Invasive Species Program December 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ............................................................................ x Introduction Overview ............................................................................. xvi How to Use This Manual .................................................... xvi Categories of Special Interest Imperiled, Rare and Uncommon Aquatic Species ..................... xx Indigenous Peoples Use of Aquatic Plants .............................. xxi Invasive Aquatic Plants Impacts ................................................................................. xxi Vectors ................................................................................. xxii Prevention Tips .................................................... xxii Early Detection and Reporting
    [Show full text]
  • Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes
    National Plant Data Team August 2012 Edible Seeds and Grains of California Tribes and the Klamath Tribe of Oregon in the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum of Anthropology Collections, University of California, Berkeley August 2012 Cover photos: Left: Maidu woman harvesting tarweed seeds. Courtesy, The Field Museum, CSA1835 Right: Thick patch of elegant madia (Madia elegans) in a blue oak woodland in the Sierra foothills The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its pro- grams and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sex- ual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250–9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Acknowledgments This report was authored by M. Kat Anderson, ethnoecologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Jim Effenberger, Don Joley, and Deborah J. Lionakis Meyer, senior seed bota- nists, California Department of Food and Agriculture Plant Pest Diagnostics Center. Special thanks to the Phoebe Apperson Hearst Museum staff, especially Joan Knudsen, Natasha Johnson, Ira Jacknis, and Thusa Chu for approving the project, helping to locate catalogue cards, and lending us seed samples from their collections.
    [Show full text]
  • NJ Native Plants - USDA
    NJ Native Plants - USDA Scientific Name Common Name N/I Family Category National Wetland Indicator Status Thermopsis villosa Aaron's rod N Fabaceae Dicot Rubus depavitus Aberdeen dewberry N Rosaceae Dicot Artemisia absinthium absinthium I Asteraceae Dicot Aplectrum hyemale Adam and Eve N Orchidaceae Monocot FAC-, FACW Yucca filamentosa Adam's needle N Agavaceae Monocot Gentianella quinquefolia agueweed N Gentianaceae Dicot FAC, FACW- Rhamnus alnifolia alderleaf buckthorn N Rhamnaceae Dicot FACU, OBL Medicago sativa alfalfa I Fabaceae Dicot Ranunculus cymbalaria alkali buttercup N Ranunculaceae Dicot OBL Rubus allegheniensis Allegheny blackberry N Rosaceae Dicot UPL, FACW Hieracium paniculatum Allegheny hawkweed N Asteraceae Dicot Mimulus ringens Allegheny monkeyflower N Scrophulariaceae Dicot OBL Ranunculus allegheniensis Allegheny Mountain buttercup N Ranunculaceae Dicot FACU, FAC Prunus alleghaniensis Allegheny plum N Rosaceae Dicot UPL, NI Amelanchier laevis Allegheny serviceberry N Rosaceae Dicot Hylotelephium telephioides Allegheny stonecrop N Crassulaceae Dicot Adlumia fungosa allegheny vine N Fumariaceae Dicot Centaurea transalpina alpine knapweed N Asteraceae Dicot Potamogeton alpinus alpine pondweed N Potamogetonaceae Monocot OBL Viola labradorica alpine violet N Violaceae Dicot FAC Trifolium hybridum alsike clover I Fabaceae Dicot FACU-, FAC Cornus alternifolia alternateleaf dogwood N Cornaceae Dicot Strophostyles helvola amberique-bean N Fabaceae Dicot Puccinellia americana American alkaligrass N Poaceae Monocot Heuchera americana
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Resources Report City of Fort Bragg Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade
    BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 West Cypress Street (APN 008-020-07) Fort Bragg Mendocino County, California prepared by: William Maslach [email protected] August 2016 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES REPORT CITY OF FORT BRAGG WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE 101 WEST CYPRESS STREET (APN 008-020-07) FORT BRAGG MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA PREPARED FOR: Scott Perkins Associate Planner City of Fort Bragg 416 North Franklin Street Fort Bragg, California PREPARED BY: William Maslach 32915 Nameless Lane Fort Bragg, California (707) 732-3287 [email protected] Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction and Background ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Scope of Work ............................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Location & Environmental Setting ................................................................................................ 1 1.4 Land Use ........................................................................................................................................ 2 1.5 Site Directions ..............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • South Ukiah Single Route Improvement
    Special Status Plant Survey Report For the Vineyard Crossing Subdivision Planned Development 156 Lovers Lane, Ukiah Mendocino County, CA Prepared for Guillon, Inc. 2550 Lakewest Drive, Suite 50 Chico, CA 95928 Office: 530-897-6458 Prepared by Jane Valerius, Botanist Jane Valerius Environmental Consulting 2893A Scotts Right of Way Sebastopol, CA 95472 707-824-1463 June 15, 2017 Vineyard Crossing Planned Development INTRODUCTION Surveys for special status plants were conducted for the 23.6-acre Vineyard Crossing Subdivision Planned Development project located at 156 Lovers Lane in Ukiah, Mendocino County, California. The purpose of the surveys was to determine if any special status plants occur on the site. The site is located in northwest Ukiah and is bordered to the north by Masonite Industrial Road (private) and Orr Springs Road (Figure 1) with Highway 101 to the east, existing vineyards to the west and Lovers Lane to the south. The assessor parcel numbers for the site are 170-030-08 and 170-040-05. The site is located on the Ukiah 7.5-minute quadrangle and the approximate center of the site is at Latitude 39°10’28.97” N and Longitude 123°12’53.15” W. METHODS Special status surveys were conducted for by Jane Valerius, botanist, on March 22, April 10, and June 13, 2017. Prior to the field visit, a list of special-status plants was compiled based on record searches of the CNDDB and the CNPS online electronic inventory. The search is based on a review of the Ukiah and Orrs Springs quadrangles which cover a 3 to 5 mile radius around the project area.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix F.7
    APPENDIX F.7 Biological Evaluation Appendix F.7 Pacific Connector Gas Pipeline Project Biological Evaluation March 2019 Prepared by: Tetra Tech, Inc. Reviewed and Approved by: USDA Forest Service BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION This page intentionally left blank BIOLOGICAL EVALUATION Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 PROPOSED ACTION AND ACTION ALTERNATIVES .................................................... 1 PRE-FIELD REVIEW ........................................................................................................ 4 RESULTS OF FIELD SURVEYS ...................................................................................... 4 SPECIES IMPACT DETERMINATION SUMMARY .......................................................... 5 DETAILED EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTION ON SPECIES CONSIDERED ............ 25 6.1 Global Discussion ........................................................................................................ 25 6.1.1 Analysis Areas and Current Environment ............................................................. 25 6.1.2 Impacts .................................................................................................................. 33 6.1.3 Conservation Measures and Mitigation ................................................................. 62 6.2 Species Accounts and Analysis of Impacts ................................................................. 63 6.2.1 Mammals ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Fountaingrove Lodge Appendix G Rare Plant Report
    Appendix G Rare Plant Survey Report Rare Plant Survey Report FOUNTAINGROVE LODGE SANTA ROSA, SONOMA COUNTY CALIFORNIA Prepared For: Mr. Steve McCullagh Aegis Senior Living 220 Concourse Blvd. Santa Rosa, California 95403 Contact: Tom Fraser [email protected] Date: May 2007 2169-G Ea st Fra nc isc o Blvd ., Sa n Ra fa e l, C A 94901 (415) 454-8868 te l (415) 454-0129 fa x info @w ra -c a .c o m www.wra-ca.com TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION.........................................................1 1.1 Study Area Description...............................................1 1.1.1 Vegetation................................................1 1.1.2 Soils.....................................................4 2.0 METHODS..............................................................6 2.1 Background Data...................................................6 2.2 Field Survey.......................................................6 3.0 RESULTS. .............................................................7 3.1 Background Data Search Results.......................................7 3.2 Field Survey Results.................................................7 4.0 CONCLUSIONS..........................................................7 5.0 REFERENCES...........................................................8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Location Map of Fountaingrove Lodge site. 2 Figure 2. Biological Communities within the Fountaingrove Lodge site. 3 Figure 3. Soils Map for the Fountaingrove Lodge site. 5 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Study Area Photographs Appendix B Special Status Plant Species Documented to Occur in the Vicinity of the Study Area Appendix C List of Observed Plant Species 1.0 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of 5 separate special status plant surveys conducted on approximately 9.85 acres to be developed as Fountaingrove Lodge (Study Area) in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California (Figure 1). The purpose of this study is to identify the location and presence of potentially occurring sensitive plant species.
    [Show full text]
  • Additions to the New Flora of Vermont
    Gilman, A.V. Additions to the New Flora of Vermont. Phytoneuron 2016-19: 1–16. Published 3 March 2016. ISSN 2153 733X ADDITIONS TO THE NEW FLORA OF VERMONT ARTHUR V. GILMAN Gilman & Briggs Environmental 1 Conti Circle, Suite 5, Barre, Vermont 05641 [email protected] ABSTRACT Twenty-two species of vascular plants are reported for the state of Vermont, additional to those reported in the recently published New Flora of Vermont. These are Agrimonia parviflora, Althaea officinalis , Aralia elata , Beckmannia syzigachne , Bidens polylepis , Botrychium spathulatum, Carex panicea , Carex rostrata, Eutrochium fistulosum , Ficaria verna, Hypopitys lanuginosa, Juncus conglomeratus, Juncus diffusissimus, Linum striatum, Lipandra polysperma , Matricaria chamomilla, Nabalus racemosus, Pachysandra terminalis, Parthenocissus tricuspidata , Ranunculus auricomus , Rosa arkansana , and Rudbeckia sullivantii. Also new are three varieties: Crataegus irrasa var. irrasa , Crataegus pruinosa var. parvula , and Viola sagittata var. sagittata . Three species that have been reported elsewhere in 2013–2015, Isoetes viridimontana, Naias canadensis , and Solidago brendiae , are also recapitulated. This report and the recently published New Flora of Vermont (Gilman 2015) together summarize knowledge of the vascular flora of Vermont as of this date. The New Flora of Vermont was recently published by The New York Botanical Garden Press (Gilman 2015). It is the first complete accounting of the vascular flora of Vermont since 1969 (Seymour 1969) and adds more than 200 taxa to the then-known flora of the state. However, the manuscript for the New Flora was finalized in spring 2013 and additional species are now known: those that have been observed more recently, that have been recently encountered (or re-discovered) in herbaria, or that were not included because they were under study at the time of finalization.
    [Show full text]